Diversity & Inclusion Knowledge
1. Diversity & Inclusion Resources Library
1.1. Itasca business case for Diversity and Inclusion
1.2. Why Diversity Matters in Health Care?
1.3. Taking on 2025: Preparing for a New Demographics
1.4. Misc DEI Resources
One Minneapolis
Generation Next Data Reports
Who We Are: A coalition of civic, business and education leaders from across Minneapolis and Saint Paul dedicated to closing achievement and opportunity gaps. We use rigorous data analysis and community engagement to identify what works and replicate the most promising practices.
STEM In Minnesota
Working together to foster an equitable, vibrant, and future-ready Minnesota.
1.5. Videos and Tools
A selection of 15+ TOOLS, FRAMEWORKS, AND RESOURCES TO CHALLENGE RACISM from CompassPoint
- Contents
How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Talking About Race
TED Talk by Jay Smooth
One of the most persistent problems of moving toward racial equity is the deep discomfort around the topic, which too often leads to silence. Culture and politics commentator Jay Smooth unpacks what it means to embrace the messiness of those conversations and create opportunities to talk openly and honestly about race.
The Danger of a Single Story
Ted Talk by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie
Narrative matters, and when one person controls the story, a multitude of voices are shut out and oppressed. That's the argument made by author and activist Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie in this eye-opening TED talk.
1.6. Minnesota Department of Human Services
D/I Info
Cultural and Ethnic Communities Leadership Council
Policy on Equity
2018 Report
More Info
1.7. Racism and the Economy -- Federal Reserve Series
Understanding the implications of structural racism in America's economy.
Link to => About the Series <==
Series Kickoff October 7, 2020
Racism forms the foundation of inequality in our society; it limits opportunity for people of color and threatens the health of our economy. While the global pandemic has intensified racial and economic disparities, the killing of George Floyd has provoked people from all walks of life to address the systems and structures that enable and perpetuate these outcomes.
The Federal Reserve Banks of Atlanta, Boston, and Minneapolis have partnered to present a series of virtual events where community, business, and academic leaders will examine the economic impact of racism and advance bold ideas and concrete actions to achieve an economy that makes opportunity available to everyone.
The kickoff event on Wednesday, October 7, 2020, was the first in a series over the next several months exploring context and actions to address systemic racism in employment, housing, education, criminal justice, and other topics.
Raphael Bostic, Neel Kashkari, and Eric Rosengren, the presidents of the Federal Reserve Banks of Atlanta, Minneapolis, and Boston were joined for this virtual event by nationally recognized experts:
- Angela Glover Blackwell, PolicyLink
- Ursula Burns, former Xerox Corporation
- Geoffrey Canada, Harlem Children’s Zone
- Carmen Rojas, Marguerite Casey Foundation
- Kai Ryssdal, Marketplace
Series Kickoff Video
Focus on Employment November 17, 2020
Employment Video
Link => Recap Article
Extracted Text
Over the past 48 years, White job seekers have been twice as likely as Black counterparts to secure employment during any four-week period, Wilson said. She added the 2-to-1 ratio holds across all ages, education levels, genders, and macroeconomic conditions, all the way back to when the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics began breaking out unemployment by race in 1972.
“Over the last 4½ decades, only the most highly educated and most experienced Black workers have approached anything near unemployment rate parity with their White counterparts, and only during periods of exceptionally low rates of unemployment,” said Wilson, director of the Economic Policy Institute’s Program on Race, Ethnicity, and the Economy.
Wilson was among several experts who joined three Federal Reserve Bank presidents on Nov. 17 in the second event of the “Racism and the Economy” series, which focused on racial inequities in the labor market. The seven-part series, sponsored by the Federal Reserve Banks of Atlanta, Boston, Minneapolis, and San Francisco, examines structural racism, its impacts, and ways to dismantle it.
Examining occupational segregation The Nov. 17 conference focused largely on “occupational segregation,” the exclusion of Blacks and Hispanics from professional and managerial roles, and over-representation of these groups in lower-wage occupations such as food preparation, cleaning, and health care services and support.
Before the pandemic, the share of Blacks and Hispanics in such work was far greater than that of Whites, said Atlanta Fed president Raphael Bostic.
Those jobs typically offer low pay, limited advancement opportunities, and few benefits. Making better jobs more accessible to people of color would help erode broad racial inequities in the labor market, numerous speakers said. But discrimination inhibits equitable outcomes, said Rebecca Dixon, executive director of the National Employment Law Project.
Dixon also cited policies dating back to New Deal programs that excluded half of all Black, Latino, and Native American workers from Social Security.
Some speakers also put blame on the Fed. Wilson said by raising the federal funds rate prematurely during economic expansions, the central bank may have shut down job growth before it reached workers of color.
Several speakers also note research that reveals that racial gaps in pay and access to higher-wage occupations persist regardless of education and skills. In fact, the job market status of Blacks is unchanged from 1950, if mass incarceration and the number of Blacks who have left the labor force entirely is accounted for, said William Rodgers, chief economist at Rutgers University’s Heldrich Center for Workforce Development.
“That’s why this conversation and what comes out of it is so important,” he said.
Proposing solutions Conference speakers proposed several solutions for eliminating racial inequities in employment markets, including:
Fostering enlightened self-interest in the corporate sector: Delta Air Lines chief executive officer Ed Bastian said executives should realize that improving recruitment, training, and advancement of workers of color boosts profits. More diverse perspectives produce more creative thinking, better decisions, and happier employees and customers, he said. Strengthening the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission: The EEOC’s funding in inflation-adjusted terms has not increased since the 1980s even as the labor force has grown by about 50 percent, Dixon noted. The result is case backlogs and generally feeble enforcement of workplace anti-discrimination rules. Rethinking job applicant screening policies and algorithms: For instance, requiring a bachelor’s degree as a screening mechanism often doesn’t make sense, when job duties don’t truly demand it, said Byron Auguste, CEO and co-founder of the nonprofit Opportunity@Work. Such a requirement immediately excludes 75 percent of Black workers, 80 percent of Hispanics, and 80 percent of rural residents, Auguste said. Presidents on why racial disparities matter to the Fed The presidents of the Atlanta, Boston, and San Francisco emphasized how racism shapes labor market conditions. The Boston Fed’s Eric Rosengren said that while economic discussions typically focus on the sheer numbers of jobs, the quality of those jobs is crucial. That’s become clear during the pandemic, during which people of color are being disproportionately affected, in part because they hold a larger share of lower quality jobs.
It can be easy to forget how important a high-quality job is these days, Rosengren said, adding he finds himself complaining after a long day of virtual meetings.
“But then I'm reminded that I do not encounter a dangerous work environment each day, that I have money to feed my family and many others don't,” Rosengren said. “I am not faced with the decision of leaving my children alone in an empty house in order to keep my job, or wondering what will happen to me or my family if I get sick and have no sick days to use.”
“The quality of jobs influences the quantity of jobs for many people of color,” he said. “More needs to be done.”
Focus on Education January 12, 2021
Announcement
Education Video
Discussion with Jeffrey Canada
Teacher of the Year Closing Reflection Takeru Nagayoshi Pandemic Impacts
Closing
Better investment in the teaching profession and black/brown teachers retaining and recruiting
Focus on Housing 3/1/2021
Housing Event Announcement
Housing Video
Single family only home zoning: 38:11
Eliminate systemic racism in appraisals
Offering restorative housing reparations
Proposer & Respondent Panel Discussion
Focus on Entrepreneurship 6/2/2022
Racism and the Economy: Focus on Entrepreneurship
The sixth installment of our virtual event series focuses on the impact of racism on entrepreneurs of color. The session will examine solutions that challenge persistent disparities and explore the potential for entrepreneurship to serve as one pathway to transform economic outcomes for communities of color and the broader economy.
Keynote speakers
- Robert E. Weems Jr., Willard W. Garvey Distinguished Professor of Business History, Wichita State University
Additional speakers
- Raphael Bostic, President, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta
- Kelly Burton, Executive Director, Black Innovation Alliance
- Nicole Childers, Executive Producer, Marketplace Morning Report (moderator)
- Charles Evans, President, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
- Patrick Harker, President, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia
- Victor Hwang, Founder and CEO, Right to Start
- Robert Kaplan, President, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas
- Neel Kashkari, President, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis
- Monika Mantilla, President and CEO, Altura Capital, and Managing Partner, Small Business Community Capital
- Sanjay Singh, Advisor, Pack Health, and Co-founder, Alabama Capital Network
- Carmen Tapio, Founder and CEO, North End Teleservices, LLC
Video Recording
Focus on Criminal Justice 2021-07-13
EVENT AGENDA
Tuesday, July 13, 2021 |
|
| 12:00 p.m. – 12:10 p.m. ET | Introduction & Opening Remarks
Raphael Bostic, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta |
| 12:10 p.m. – 12:45 p.m. ET | The Challenge for Building a Racially Equitable Criminal Legal System
Phillip Atiba Goff, Yale University and Center for Policing Equity |
| 12:45 p.m. – 1:10 p.m. ET | A Conversation Between Keith Ellison and Neel Kashkari
Keith Ellison, Minnesota Attorney General |
| 1:10 p.m. – 1:50 p.m. ET | Understanding Connections Between Segregation, Policing, and the Economy
Yvette Gentry, Metro United Way Moderator: |
| 1:50 p.m. – 1:55 p.m. ET | Break
|
| 1:55 p.m. – 2:30 p.m. ET | The Impacts of Nonviolent Convictions and Monetary Sanctions
Jennifer Doleac, Texas A&M University Moderator: |
| 2:30 p.m. – 2:50 p.m. ET | Reflections on the Criminal Legal System and the Economy
Raphael Bostic, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Moderator: |
| 2:50 p.m. – 2:55 p.m. ET | Closing Remarks
Eric Rosengren, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston |
Focus on Health September 9, 2021
Information
Video Recording
Life Expectency https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=786
Hispanic Perspective https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=1151
Bill Fritz: Structured Racism https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=1597
Detroit https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=2078
Stress https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=2581
Policy Proposal
Proposal: https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=4181 Asian American Experience: lack of data disaggregation, miscategorizaiton
Birth Impact: https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=4515
Video from Cheyenne River Siouix Tibe https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=4913
Responses
Health Partner: data https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=5958 Co-designing: https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=6156
Trust: https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=6285 Media reporting (standardization): https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=6615
How to create change: https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=6784 lack of incentive toward equity; Expanding pipeline: https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=6872; Cultural humility: https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=6929 partnership with community, co-designing; Trust: https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=7000 (data collection)
We got us video: https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=7172
Summary with Federal Reserve Presidents: https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=7376: Neal: https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=7590 ; Trust, information source, working with community: https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=7789; Vacine Hesitancy: https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=7921 creative intervention, GDP depends on healthy workforce, Prioritization: https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=8106 - economic driver, changing demographics, embrace immigration; Commitment of leadership: https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=8573;
Closing:https://youtu.be/_2IaWFICEpM?t=8762
Link to more info
1.8. Beam Links
Links to resources captured on Beam database
2. Immigration
2.1. One size does not fit all when it comes to enacting deportation policy
Legal definitions of various immigrant classes: Refugees, Asylum, Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Entry Without Inspection, etc.
One size does not fit all when it comes to enacting deportation policy
A cornerstone of the Trump campaign is a mass deportation effort to expel “illegal aliens” from the United States, undertaken under a claim that the undocumented fall within the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. Should this assertion be administratively implemented and judicially upheld, the government will have substantially greater authority to expel a broader range of foreign nationals without judicial or administrative review, create a vastly expanded program of immediate expulsion bereft of traditional due process protections and eliminate a balancing act between the initial illegal entry and other mitigating factors. This piece parses through these various humanitarian categories and makes some initial prognostications whether these programs will continue to remain in existence and, if so, under what terms and conditions.
Thus far, we are seeing five developments that significantly impact impending deportation policies: 1) the incoming administration has made an avowed commitment to deport “illegal aliens”; 2) the incoming president enjoys an immense concentration of power given the composition of the Congress and the Supreme Court, so he is expected to move quite quickly on the MAGA agenda; 3) the costs, logistics and economic disruption of mass deportation will be enormous and could create boundaries to a radically expanded deportation policy, although ideological fervor will go a long way in pursuing a more activist removal agenda; 4) his nominations to cabinet and senior advisory positions create a very muscular deportation team; 5) but contrary to the push for “expedited removal,” the legal and advocacy communities will challenge any non-judicial mass removal movement, intent on ensuring that due process safeguards remain in place in removal proceedings.
But all this begs the identification of those “illegal aliens” who will be subject to draconian deportation policies. This will not be a “one size fits all” situation. Rather, U.S. humanitarian immigration programs need to be broken down into the following categories:
- Refugees. Here, there is an organized, modulated program undertaken pursuant to an annual Presidential Determination on the capacity of this country to provide protection to foreign nationals fleeing persecution in their home countries. Such individuals are carefully vetted for security and health considerations. The program is evolving into a public-private partnership in which civil society is providing increased financial and other support measures to those in need. But the program is vulnerable both to substantially reduced numerical quotas set under the annual Presidential order and major cutbacks to federal benefits programs.
- Asylum. A related concept to refugee admissions is asylum, which has been created under statutory enactment and provides a foreign national already on the territory of the United States the right to seek protection from persecution in his/her home country. It is imperative to break down this class of applicants into two component parts:
- a. CBP1 asylum seekers. These are foreign nationals who registered through a program of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) that allows them authorized entry along the southwest border for the explicit purpose of filing for asylum. The important point here to note is that their initial entry to this country was authorized and an initial determination was made that they have a “credible fear” of persecution, thereby clearing the initial hurdle in an asylum case. But the ultimate adjudication of their asylum case is currently taking several years. In judging the ongoing viability of this CBP1 asylum program, the administration may challenge what it considers to be a lax “credible fear” standard. However, on balance, there has been fidelity to the law in the asylum applicant’s initial entry and, as such, there is a good chance that this program will be preserved, at least for those already in the United States.
- b. Entry Without Inspection (EWI). In this instance, a foreign national has skirted the authorized entry process by surreptitiously entering the United States and, once here, filing an asylum application. There is an initial “credible fear” determination that historically has overridden the initial act of unlawful entry, although final asylum adjudications are currently taking 5-8 years. But the unlawful initial entry has been highlighted by the incoming administration as grounds for removal that may not be overridden by the subsequent action of filing for asylum. Even if an asylum claim is allowed to proceed since it is a statutorily created right, the incoming administration has greater latitude to revoke interim benefits such as employment authorization and/or to create substantially more stringent adjudication standards for asylum approval.
- EWI or overstays who have never sought asylum or other forms of immigration status. In many instances, the undocumented have either entered without authorization or overstayed their term of legal status. As a realistic matter, they can oftentimes stay here undetected for years, thereby establishing roots in the community and creating families in this country. But they lack authorization to stay and as such, even under current law, they are subject to removal. What is unclear, though, is the degree to which they will have the right to a fair and impartial hearing to determine if there are grounds for relief or whether there are equities that warrant relief. There is currently also the open question on the degree to which the incoming administration will aggressively seek out those without authorization, such as workplace raids, profiling of economic sectors, military/quasi-military action, expanded detention facilities and “expedited removal” to avoid the time and expense of an administrative proceeding.
- Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA or, as it is more popularly known, “Dreamers”). This is an initiative that has long been in limbo, aimed at providing permanent resident status to children of parents who came without authorization to the United States. While these children came without authorization, they did not choose to come to the U.S., have spent virtually their whole lives in this country, and have developed equities that justify their attainment of lawful status. At present, the DACA program provides protection to around 800,000 individuals. During Trump 1.0, the Supreme Court denied the initiative to end DACA under a procedural assertion that the termination order failed to provide a “reasoned explanation for its action” of abolishing the program. It is definitely open to question whether the current court would reach a similar outcome and, presumably, the incoming Administration now has a roadmap on how to craft an order terminating DACA, should it so desire.
- Humanitarian Parole. This is a vehicle that provides entry permission to classes of foreign nationals who are at risk of persecution and extreme harm in their home countries. This legal doctrine was used on behalf of Afghans and Ukrainians in the aftermath of the disruptions in those countries and is currently used to protect nationals in selected situations. Initial indications are that this form of relief will be either abrogated or significantly curtailed, unless there are significant foreign policy benefits.
- Temporary Protected Status (TPS). This provides protection parsed out in renewable periods ranging from 6-18 months to foreign nationals already in the United States but who would face severe harm in their home country owing to war, environmental disaster, or other extraordinary circumstances. At present, TPS is available to foreign nationals from 16 countries. In all likelihood, many of these country programs will not be extended.
- Central American Minors Program (CAM). This is a program allowing children living in designated failed states to reunite with parents already in the United States. While Trump 1.0 was widely excoriated for its family separation policies, here the child is already living abroad and there may be less popular pressure to maintain this program.
- Child Protective Measures. There are various programs to provide relief to either unaccompanied childhood arrivals or children who have been abandoned, neglected, or abused by a parent. In such cases and pursuant to a judicial determination in juvenile or family court of the need for state intervention to provide protection, a qualifying child can seek lawful immigration status as a humanitarian effort. There has been no pronouncement thus far on the fate of these programs, although the child detention policies implemented during Trump 1.0 were hugely unpopular and there may be a desire to avoid the negative publicity that was previously experienced.
A central issue that will be played out during this forthcoming period of time is whether the initial act of illegal entry is an unforgivable sin that justifies an override to time-honored options to subsequently seek relief vs. the degree to which the legal and advocacy communities as well as the public at-large will countenance a massive, streamlined removal program devoid of administrative and judicial safeguards and accept the societal, community, and economic disruptions that a broad-based deportation policy would create. It also remains to be seen whether an expanded removal policy will ignore the nuanced sub-categories appearing above or opt for a unitary, blanket approach of expulsion for those seeking safety and security in this country.
Robert Aronson is a past chair of HIAS, the agency of the American Jewish community providing services globally of safety and protection to refugees and others fleeing persecution.
This article first appeared on MinnPost and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.